The City on Fire

Quote: AZDuffman

It might not have the structure of a classic group, but it is a group aligned along leftist cause nonetheless. It sure gets members for a riot when it needs them, so I will call it a "group" based on that.

As you wish. I just assume that some people are simply inclined to participate in riots. I also assume others like free stuff, despite the lack of legality behind how it is acquired.

Quote:

*sigh* Nobody says "every single member." Point is BLM is a racist, violent group causing rioting and looting. But so many will not condemn the looters. It goes deep. In some previous riot, Baltimore maybe, a black guy I used to work with refused to condemn the looters. He said, "they're frustrated!" This is a white-collar guy. He is not the only one. He de-friended me on FB which is just as well because he would be posting his hate all over my feed.

Remember when the left went nuts because Trump would not condemn a group who had a peaceful, permitted demonstration? Now their side riots and loots and they are silent, except when they are excusing it.

I'll condemn individual looters and rioters, as you present them to me, but not the group. That would be unfair to anyone who associates with the group who does not do rioting and looting.

What peaceful demonstration are you referring to? I'd be lying if I said I don't occasionally try to deliberately ignore various goings-on.

Quote: Mission146

I'll condemn individual looters and rioters, as you present them to me, but not the group. That would be unfair to anyone who associates with the group who does not do rioting and looting.

Thank You
I consider myself BLM
I always protest peacefully.
This is one of the reasons I have AZ and Shrek blocked. Sick of their BS towards me regarding BLM

Quote: terapined

Thank You
I consider myself BLM
I always protest peacefully.
This is one of the reasons I have AZ and Shrek blocked. Sick of their BS towards me regarding BLM

I agree with you on many issues.

And, I hope that you do not feel that I unfairly attack you on BLM.

But, as a leftist, I feel that BLM has dangers. It is funded by many shady (to put it mildly) organizations, now has clearly unreasonably objectives (defund all police in America...), and defends many criminals based purely on race who were clearly in the wrong (Michael Brown)….. It may or may not have had good intentions when it was founded. But, it has been politized and taken over by forces who wish to subvert U.S. Power and sow discord. I do not think that we need this in America. We need leftists who unite, not divide. It favors emotion over facts. Even when it is right, (Floyd), it takes it too far...

I feel that many concerns about BLM are founded and logical. And, that is not racist to say. I am about as non-racist as it gets, I love everyone. But, to have a position based on logic, you have to be willing to look at facts (even if they are hard).

Quote: Mission146

As you wish. I just assume that some people are simply inclined to participate in riots. I also assume others like free stuff, despite the lack of legality behind how it is acquired.

I'll condemn individual looters and rioters, as you present them to me, but not the group. That would be unfair to anyone who associates with the group who does not do rioting and looting.

By that logic do you only condemn KKK members who engage in violence because it is unfair to those who just attend the meetings? Just checking for consistency.

Quote:

What peaceful demonstration are you referring to? I'd be lying if I said I don't occasionally try to deliberately ignore various goings-on.

When Trump said there were "good people on both sides."

Quote: Gandler

I agree with you on many issues.

And, I hope that you do not feel that I unfairly attack you on BLM.

But, as a leftist, I feel that BLM has dangers. It is funded by many shady (to put it mildly) organizations, now has clearly unreasonably objectives (defund all police in America...), and defends many criminals based purely on race who were clearly in the wrong (Michael Brown)….. It may or may not have had good intentions when it was founded. But, it has been politized and taken over by forces who wish to subvert U.S. Power and sow discord. I do not think that we need this in America. We need leftists who unite, not divide. It favors emotion over facts. Even when it is right, (Floyd), it takes it too far...

I feel that many concerns about BLM are founded and logical. And, that is not racist to say. I am about as non-racist as it gets, I love everyone. But, to have a position based on logic, you have to be willing to look at facts (even if they are hard).

Bottom line
Most of BLM is just people that have nothing to do with any funded organization and simply support the meaning behind the statement "Black Lives Matter"
If there is an organization, its meaningless in my eyes because I simply support the meaning on "Black Lives Matter"
I have said over and over
I DO NOT support Michael Brown
Regardless
I still believe Black Lives matter
If this view is offensive to you like it is to AZ and Shrek, so be it

Quote: AZDuffman

By that logic do you only condemn KKK members who engage in violence because it is unfair to those who just attend the meetings? Just checking for consistency.

When Trump said there were "good people on both sides."

Define, "Condemn." If you're asking whether or not I would say they are involved in an illegal act, the answer would be, 'No,' because Freedom of Speech just exists and is unconcerned with the specific thing being talked about. I reserve the right to disagree with their ideas or what they say, of course, but they can definitely gather together and say whatever they want to as long as it consists of only words.

Quote: Mission146

Define, "Condemn." If you're asking whether or not I would say they are involved in an illegal act, the answer would be, 'No,' because Freedom of Speech just exists and is unconcerned with the specific thing being talked about. I reserve the right to disagree with their ideas or what they say, of course, but they can definitely gather together and say whatever they want to as long as it consists of only words.

I mean does this standard apply to the KKK:

Quote: Mission146

I'll condemn individual looters and rioters, as you present them to me, but not the group.

Do you or do you not condemn the KKK? Or is it like BLM where you call out individual members but not the group?

Christian hating ANTIFA bigot should look before he crosses.

What is it about these liberals and disrupting peaceful demonstrations by others?

Quote: AZDuffman

I mean does this standard apply to the KKK:



Do you or do you not condemn the KKK? Or is it like BLM where you call out individual members but not the group?

Of course I condemn the KKK in the sense that I am completely against their ideas. As far as calling them out--and I don't know how much more simply I can put this-individuals either commit a crime or they do not. I can oppose the group's general ideas without automatically thinking that everyone in the group has done an illegal act.

If I read the entire BLM platform, which I haven't, I'm sure there would be at least one thing I disagree with. Does that mean I oppose the entire group? No. My point is individual people either did looting or rioting, or they did peaceful public protest. One is illegal, the other isn't. I'm not sure why this concept is so difficult for you---you usually like the notion of individual accountability.